Should the LMS have built more Moguls and fewer Class 5s

I think the Stanier Moguls had better RA and should have been cheaper to build .
the TE was , on paper very similar .

were the Class 5s really a better engine ?

 

The Stanier Moguls were a 5MT (5P/4F, 5P/5F, 6P/5F, 5MT)engine as well with a higher TE than the Black Five and, also weighed only 3 tones less and with one less wheel the axle load will be very close if not higher. It would have been better to build a new class more like the GWR Manor/BR 4MT 4-6-0 if better RA was wanted.

 

There were 285 2-6-0s, 245 from George Hughes and 40 from William Stanier. His intention had always been to concentrate on the 4-6-0s, which eventually totalled 842 members, but these took some time to develop and the Traffic people were, in the meantime, looking for more Horwich Crabs; the Stanier 2-6-0s filled the vacancy but were never envisaged as a long term solution.

Which was the better engine? That depends on the traffic being worked. The Black Fives generally get the limelight due to there greater use on express passenger workings. And here they were undoubtedly the better type. But once you get to the heavy goods traffic, the reverse is true: the 2-6-0s of both classes were stronger - quite a lot stronger - with better adhesion and, just as important, brakes. Between these two extremes, the three classes worked turn and turn about with little if anything to choose between them. If you had a fitted goods, parcels, local passenger, etc., it made no difference which you had, and you could also add in Jubilees and Baby Scots to the mix, and to some extent, 8Fs.

Another issue which is often not realised is that many of the 2-6-0 workings were overnight and not generally seen by the enthusiast. The Black 'uns were, in all senses, more visible.

 

They actually started as rated at 4F, along with the Derby 4. For obvious reasons, that didn't last long!

RA was seen as a problem during the design stage but it had nothing to do with weight or axle load; it was the width across the cylinders to which the Chief Civil Engineer objected, producing a long list of places where they would be barred on this account. WAS had a Horwich Crab fitted with lead 'fingers' to the profile of the proposed cylinder layout sent around the system and in only few places was there any impingement, so the CCE had to make the necessary modifications to his platform edges and the class went into traffic.

 

The 4-6-0 type will run sweeter in track than a 2-6-0 maybee?
One way to find out , could have been to compare reprofiling costs of leading drivers.

 

I saw a fair few of the Moguls , but only on shed as far as I can remember .

 

Perhaps a Black 5 (good route availability) fitted with lead fingers could check gauging around the modern network instead of using laser scanners and computer programmes.

 

Before the introduction of the Black 5's Crabs were commonly used on express workings.

What I dont understand was why build more 4F's once the 2-6-0's were avalible

 

What was the comparative cost between building a 4F and a Stanier mogul? What about the per mile running cost, given the sheds were well supplied with spares for the older design?

I don’t know the answer. But I suspect the accountants weren’t mugs: no point building locos more expensive than needed until the point the cheaper loco could no longer do the required work.

(Maybe, of course, the fractured political situation in LMS loco affairs meant some designs perpetuated longer than necessary: even blessed with the greatest management, you don’t turn a company of that size on a sixpence).

Tom

 

not used on express working very much in the '50s but they would often appear on semi fasts

 

My hero, Adrian Tester in his book on 4Fs,compares and 4Fs were better.

ISBN 978 0 957077904

 

Where can I get a copy?

 

Given the numbers built it seems rather a pity that neither the GWR or LMS 2-6-0's get the recognition they deserve

 

https://www.advanced-steam.org/books-for-sale/

 

This is the type of book that enthusiasts should read. There is a lack of informed balance in opinions voiced, in the main because people are swayed by names that they know, Cox being one example.

 

Yes ,in BR days and up to the time when diesels started to appear ,the class of 45 loco's were split between 3D Aston(Birmingham),5B Crewe South, 6B Mold Jnc (Chester) and 6C Birkenhead, all freight depots.5A Crewe North used to borrow one or two from Crewe south now and again.
I used to see them on fitted freights at the south end of the WCML,but only one or two a day on a 12 hour stint.

 

Adrian Tester is a name I've known for years but he doesn't sway me when it comes to the 4Fs. His books are still a very good read, though. I wish there were more like them.

 

yep . the GWR moguls were a fine engine . dunno why they are not being built for preserved lines

 

the 4F was a cheap and nasty loco that should have never been built in the numbers it was .
I was pulled by one on an excursion. how the fireman managed I really don't know . when we got up to 30 mph the engine tailwagged the tender so violently they were going in opposite directions to the tune of nearly 2' 0.
and this when a Cauliflower was capable of running up to 70mph.

 

I'd say he's in a minority of one, then! I got my opinions from the men who worked them. While they were considered Okay, there was little in the way of enthusiasm for the class